Hello Wonketteers, by now you have probably realized that Gawker released 950 pages of Bain Capital records, and that this is either very important or a waste of everyone’s time, depending on whom you ask. WHICH IS IT? IS IT IMPORTANT OR IS IT A WASTE OF TIME? And also, what is a total return equity swap, and why should you care? And how did Romney manage to give $100,000,000 to his heirs without paying taxes on any of it? These are very pressing and important questions, and it is your lucky day because the answers are contained herein. Behold, Part 2 of Wonkette’s guide to the Gawker Super Scooper, where all questions will be answered and all doubts will be assuaged.
Well, no-one could sustain anger over credit default swaps in part because the media never properly explained what they were and how they threatened complete meltdown of the global financial system. All we really got was that they were somehow bad but everyone did them. We did not get that they were used in ways that were entirely indistinguishable from straight-up bets, except for who was doing it, used to deliberately increase banks' exposure to the risk profile of the mortgage market when there weren't enough actual mortgages being written to sate their ravenous appetite for the profits they had been making while the bubble was inflating. It was not explained in the MSM that banking and shadow-banking entities had built up trillions of dollars of exposure without ever having to put it on their books, and without there being any hope in hell of ever meeting their obligations if ever there was a correlated increased in default risk, such as occurs when a housing bubble pops.
I think if the population had understood that the entire financial sector was making pure bets they couldn't hope to pay out on and never had to reveal to shareholders or investors, and that it was completely legal because Phil Gram wanted to help Enron fuck the state of California, the anger would have been sustainable, and the media wouldn't be able to use the fact that people weren't that mad about stuff the media abjectly failed to explain as an excuse not to bother even trying to explain stuff any more.
It is that personality disorder at work called 'authoritarianism', the blind worship of authority, which is denoted by either money or celebrity.
Well that's entirely absurd and nonsensical in its own terms. If I put a million dollars in a no-interest checking account, it bears no income, but is transparently not worth $0. If I buy a brick of gold, it bears no income, but is transparently not worth $0.
A share in a fund is just that - a claim to a share of the value of the assets in the fund. The fund has a calculable value, so the share has a calculable value, entirely separate from whatever dividend it may or may not have paid this year, and which is obviously very different from zero. To claim it has no value is an obvious lie, and lying to the IRS is something that would get you or I in a tremendous amount of trouble.
You mean, "by being there when all the money that was already committed before he even arrived rolled in, and also by violating the conflict of interest policy he signed"?
I'm sure he words it a little differently.
Well, no-one could sustain anger over credit default swaps in part because the media never properly explained what they were and how they threatened complete meltdown of the global financial system. All we really got was that they were somehow bad but everyone did them. We did not get that they were used in ways that were entirely indistinguishable from straight-up bets, except for who was doing it, used to deliberately increase banks' exposure to the risk profile of the mortgage market when there weren't enough actual mortgages being written to sate their ravenous appetite for the profits they had been making while the bubble was inflating. It was not explained in the MSM that banking and shadow-banking entities had built up trillions of dollars of exposure without ever having to put it on their books, and without there being any hope in hell of ever meeting their obligations if ever there was a correlated increased in default risk, such as occurs when a housing bubble pops.
I think if the population had understood that the entire financial sector was making pure bets they couldn't hope to pay out on and never had to reveal to shareholders or investors, and that it was completely legal because Phil Gram wanted to help Enron fuck the state of California, the anger would have been sustainable, and the media wouldn't be able to use the fact that people weren't that mad about stuff the media abjectly failed to explain as an excuse not to bother even trying to explain stuff any more.
At least the likes of Blackbeard reveled in their outlawry.
whoa now wait just one second: FIRE CONGRESS!?!?!
BTW, doesn't this effectively transfer Mitt's capital gain liability to his children?
Mitt Romney: hates paying taxes so much he'll make his sons do it for him.
What a guy!
My thoughts on this: If it's legal and totally above board, why did this practice stop in the early 2000s?
Hey, that sounds good and I'm hungry, could you post your cabbage recipes? I can still afford cabbage.
Try them tempura battered and deep-fried, with that sauce they use with pot-stickers. Mmmm!
I'll tell you something, no matter his wealth, Romney can't get any better laughs than I get for free here.
Would I be wrong to assert that this behavior is criminal according to the essential concept of criminality?
It is that personality disorder at work called 'authoritarianism', the blind worship of authority, which is denoted by either money or celebrity.
Well that's entirely absurd and nonsensical in its own terms. If I put a million dollars in a no-interest checking account, it bears no income, but is transparently not worth $0. If I buy a brick of gold, it bears no income, but is transparently not worth $0.
A share in a fund is just that - a claim to a share of the value of the assets in the fund. The fund has a calculable value, so the share has a calculable value, entirely separate from whatever dividend it may or may not have paid this year, and which is obviously very different from zero. To claim it has no value is an obvious lie, and lying to the IRS is something that would get you or I in a tremendous amount of trouble.
How to make a million dollars:
First, start with a million dollars Second, pay no taxes Third, pat yourself on the back, you did it.
Now, buy my book. Oh crap I just gave away the ending, oops.
Silly kittie, you don't move to the Caymans, you just "move" to the Caymans.
You mean, "by being there when all the money that was already committed before he even arrived rolled in, and also by violating the conflict of interest policy he signed"?
I'm sure he words it a little differently.
That's OK. Mittbot3000's programming does not include a need for this human thing you call "laughter".
As always, <a href="http:\/\/home.cc.umanitoba.ca\/~altemey\/" target="_blank">Bob Altermeyer</a> is recommended reading.